If you are new to the forums, you must register a free account before you can post. The forums have a separate registration from the rest of www.chronofhorse.com, so your log in information for one will not automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Having a hard time, amongst the french youtube or vimeo videos, finding a good one on the flexions. All their stuff is on DVD. It should be available to everyone for free in snippets.

This video shows the handler doing the neck stretching at the walk which I have never done or seen. I always did my flexions the "Froissard" way following his pictures which I was taught is the most traditional. (flexions of the jaws, the pole slightly, the neck longitudinally, etc...) Anyone else have some examples??

True there is alot of info out there that shows the entire neck bending and claiming that is a "flexion" in the traditional sense.

Albeit she goes through the flexions quickly (I dont know if she is in his courses/a teacher/or just trying to copy)....they are 1 mobilize the jaw (higher/light/chewing); 2 lateral flexiblity (very slightly/showing mobilization w/o longitudinal flexion); 3 increase lateral flexiblity (but NOT bending at the withers which shifts weight onto the shoulders (like BB), but greater flexibility which still in self carriage)...all should have a closed posture/weight on each leg). From the greater lateral flexibility the horse can be asked to mobilize the jaw and then 4 extend the neck (aka chew the reins fdo/open the throat latch with a lifted chest). Imho it is all run together, not progressive. But still pleasing.

The "indirect rein of oppostition" may or may not be classical, it is however mentioned in Training Hunters, Jumpers and Hacks (Brig. Gen. Harry D. Chamberlain), a book I actually own, a book written by one of the authors of our U.S. Cavalry manuals. It is also mentioned in the other U.S. Cavalry books that I don't own (which I regret having not purchased when I had the chance).

I have heard of it many times. I don't know the true origin of it, but at one time I did hear a discussion that it was thought to be traceable back to several western countries, at the very least.

I use it, especially in very early groundwork, and maybe later in early under saddle work.

Here is why I use it. I can back a horse up, on the ground, without having the full force of a straightened spine to deal with. A horse can brace his spine with his head up and walk right over me. If I put a bend in the spine, bent sideways slightly, the neck will be 'overbent' compared to the body, ideally it will look like the leg yield, bent neck, body straight.

For me, this is one of the earliest requests to control the rear leg from the front end through the shoulder, in this case the opposite rear leg.

Once I do this and the horse gives to it, I can begin to control either hind leg from the front, through the shoulders.

I transfer that into work under saddle, but I begin to transfer the aids somewhat.

This is strictly early work, green horses, falls into the early turn on the forehand, turn on the haunches, leg yield type work. The horse is just beginning to learn "the aids", especially as they will develop into the leg and seat aids.

Indirect rein is one of the five rein effects http://glenshee.blogspot.com/2008/08...roduction.html But there is a difference between bending and flexion. The BB shows bending and shifting the weight onto the shoulder. Since we are discussing french school, imho that (bending) would not be what is desired. Flexion can grant one better results, bending must be even through the body (and create better balance).

Ideayoda, I agree with what you are saying about 'bending' vs 'flexion'.

The Branderup video, the in-hand top down view only, is bending from poll to tail, but when he does the bending (side to side), he lifts the horse's head first before he aks for the specific bend.

That lifting I believe is the same exercise as the Phillip Karl student video with the young woman doing "flexions" from the ground. She lifts the horse's head up and it effects the muscles from poll to third vertebrae, or so (maybe includes fourth and fifth), back. Up, but not meant to influence the back of the horse, yet. It is the "set-up" for asking for the lateral bending using other aids.

In the bb vid the horse is NOT just bending head to tail, it is bending too much in the neck, that is why the weight is transfered outside/leaning over the outside shoulder. This should NOT happen, the horse should show flexion (atlas/axis) lightly, or more so, but NOT at the root of the neck.

The horse should NOT need lifting UNLESS it is too low in the first place. The reasoning for lifting is to keep the flexion VERY specific and keep even weight in each corner. That 'defined flexion' is what extends the muscles/keeps self carriage.

I did not say that I though BB was 'correct' in his overall schooling methods, I was trying to find some video material that was clear enough to show certain aspects of specific exercises or manuevers.

I am specifially discussing the 'bring the head up' flexion or manuever.

The girl may or may not be a PK student, but she is using a 'flexion' that I actually use on horses that have been ruined by being ridden behind the vertical, breaking at the third vertebrae back or further back.

I learned of it from reading Hunters, Jumpers and Hacks (the bad habits section and how to correct).

And the way that I use the lateral incorrect bending exercise addresses a totally different problem in the horse than whatever BB is doing with it.

And by 'incorrect' I mean, not having the spine of the horse bent evenly from poll to tail.

However, I am using it on a horse that had never been asked to bend at all through the body and who has apparently not been taught the meaning of halt. Ever. And who had no qualms about walking right over someone.

The horse should NOT need lifting UNLESS it is too low in the first place. The reasoning for lifting is to keep the flexion VERY specific and keep even weight in each corner. That 'defined flexion' is what extends the muscles/keeps self carriage.

I have read several times now about the 'rider/trainer/handler" lifting the forehand or wither. This seems counterintuitive to me (sounds like hand riding--ie horse is driven up to a closed hand in order to raise the forehand or raise the neck). How is it different from say "Driving Seat Methods" if that makes since. How does one "raise the wither".

Sorry--Im still waiting for the book to enlighten me---I understand raising of the spine, lightening the forehand, and the feel of horse lifting the wither under a rider---just unsure about this "Lifting" the front without shortening the neck (or the million other "incorrect" things). I guess Im stuck on the horse not "Needing" it----which does make since to me--it should not need it.

I agree that BENDING should be even head to tail (following the (curved)line that would represent its level of training. But flexion laterally is at the atlas/axis, it is part of riding 'in position' at its very simplest. Standing flexions are just that....lateral flexions, NOT bending. One preceeds the other.

Lifting of the bit in the horses mouth (can do)does a couple of things. It can change balance even just standing still, and it mobilizes the jaw. The only way in which it lifts the forehand/chest is because the change of balance (if necessary rein back/close the hindlegs/put a leg in each corner). Then if the horse will seek the hand/follow it, it will support with the top line.

The horse is not driven up to the hand, it changes it balance. Vertical hh are VERY traditional actions (holding/driving/closing the hand/pulling backward are not). The aid is NEVER sustained, it is neutral.

If the horse is ridden up and open and actively in the first place, ridden on large circles over time it will OFFER longitudinal flexion with a mobile jaw (rather than the ever popular 'give behind the poll' which is often seen from training level on. Such a horse can never take a hh, they will merely flex longitudinally more and more...and they will REALLY need vertical hh repeatedly to change at all.

But the flexions (high/light; light lateral flexion; more flexion still upright; then chew fdo from the flexion) DO teach the horse how to respond w/o the weight of the rider. Methodical work.

Those who mentioned that this is just good old-time basic training are RIGHT--I actually learned it from old Gordon Wright books as a junior back before anyone was calling it "dressage." Hunters were schooled this way up until the 1980's, and the method actually underlies the "American Jumping Style" as discussed by Morris and Steinkraus. That's because it was brought to this country by army officers at the Fort Riley Cavalry School who studied it extensively in France in the 1920's and '30's.

Brig. Gen. Harry Chamberlain (Hunters, Jumpers and Hacks) helped Gordon Wright put those books together if I remember correctly. All the foundation for the US Cavalry method.

The horse is not driven up to the hand, it changes it balance. Vertical hh are VERY traditional actions (holding/driving/closing the hand/pulling backward are not). The aid is NEVER sustained, it is neutral.

The "closing of the hand" and the "opening of the hand" I think are quite traditional.

If one is riding the horse forward at the trot and opens the hand in conjunction with the inside hip lifting and slightly forward (or using the outside leg behind the girth in early training) the horse should canter. If one is going forward at the trot and closes the hand (while still riding foward) the horse should halt.

Lifting of the bit in the horses mouth (can do)does a couple of things. It can change balance even just standing still, and it mobilizes the jaw. The only way in which it lifts the forehand/chest is because the change of balance (if necessary rein back/close the hindlegs/put a leg in each corner). Then if the horse will seek the hand/follow it, it will support with the top line.

The horse is not driven up to the hand, it changes it balance. Vertical hh are VERY traditional actions (holding/driving/closing the hand/pulling backward are not). The aid is NEVER sustained, it is neutral.

Ok, thanks for the clarification--now its making more since. This is actually what happened when I attempted to help my pony make the connection to the Spanish walk--lifted bit by raising the hand (not backwards/taking) and he responded by "lifting the front". --lightbulb moment. It was only a single attempt--but I thought his response surprising.

Originally Posted by ideayoda

If the horse is ridden up and open and actively in the first place, ridden on large circles over time it will OFFER longitudinal flexion with a mobile jaw (rather than the ever popular 'give behind the poll' which is often seen from training level on. Such a horse can never take a hh, they will merely flex longitudinally more and more...and they will REALLY need vertical hh repeatedly to change at all.

Yeah, this too, I have had transformative results using the simple flexions with my pony---but did mention I have seen similar results just working a circle.

My husband purchased the PK book for me: Long Reining: The Saumur Method. It arrived today so Im quite excited about sitting down with it later. Still waiting on the others to arrive--not sure it will be soon thanks to Sandy.

If the horse is ridden up and open and actively in the first place, ridden on large circles over time it will OFFER longitudinal flexion with a mobile jaw (rather than the ever popular 'give behind the poll' which is often seen from training level on. .

yep. and the cool thing is even stubby legged ponies can do this too if ridden forward on bended lines - its pretty damn cool!